we was playing 5-10k blinds and it goes around the table to behind the button and he only has 14k left so he goes all in which is the correct way to play out the hand

1. if a player wants to call the all in of 14k they must go 20k as that would be the min raise amount allowed as there is players with action pending after this player.

2. flat calls the 14k but players with action pending after this player can reraise if they want?

3. everyone must flat call the 14k and the flop comes out.

just had a few arugments over this at my games .

the way i see it is the big blind has wanted to raise but didnt have anuff for a full raise so the first player that wanted to call would make it 20k as that is the min raise amount and if noone calls his 20k then he just matchs the 14k

First of all, you did not mention the limit of the game being played. I will assume it is no limit.

In no limit, each player may fold, call the 14K or raise...the min raise is to 24K not 20K. If the game were limit, the all-in (being less than 50% of the required legal raise), would have been action only not counting as a raise. Remember, in limit poker there is usually a limit (or cap) on the number of raises.Back to no limit. The 50% rule does not apply and a raise must be at least the size of the largest amount wagered on that street.

you totally miss was i was asking tho and yes its not limit if blinds was 5-10k and behind the button shoved for 14k which is less then the min raise rule does the next player in turn have to go to 20k or just flat call the 14k

I don't believe I missed what you were saying, and Dave confirmed what I wrote. The only way a player could make the bet 20K would be if he were all-in, too. The minimum raise in your described situation is 24K. Only limit poker would recognize 20K as the correct raise.

I am going to back-track a bit on what Dave wrote on his last post: "If there are no raises, when action returns to those who have already acted, they can only fold or call." This is true if you are not counting the blinds or if we are referring to the turn or river, but in this case, the small blind could raise. Likewise if the small blind called the all-in, the big blind could have also raised.

Hi Luke... great question, I've renamed the thread a bit so it's obvious this question also pertains to re-opening the bet.

First, by "behind the button" I assume you mean the button is on the player who pushed all-in for 14k.

This means that every other player except the SB and BB have already acted. The SB and BB still have their option open.

Because there's an all-in wager for less than a min-raise, players who have already acted can only call the 14k, only the SB and BB can raise. If they choose to raise they have to raise on top of the 14k because "every bet in no-limit is considered a completed bet" (per long-standing RRoP), and there's no option to "complete" the 14k to 20k here.

If either the SB or BB does raise, the minimum they can make it is thus 14k + 10k = 24k total. If one of them does raise then ALL the remaining players at the table can then re-raise because they are facing a full min-raise.

One twist here to your illustration: let's say the SB pushes all-in for a total of 20k (including his 5k SB), then that also re-opens the betting for players who have already acted, because the combination of the two all-in wagers constitutes a min-raise even though neither by itself is a min-raise.

Obviously, those that haven't acted yet, as well as the blinds could raise.

The early 10K limpers are facing a full raise, so they can re-raise.

However, the later 14K limpers already had an opportunity to re-raise. The new raise to 20K is not enough to open the re-raise option on their 14K limp. Their only option is to call or fold.

Quote from: TDA Rule 44, first part

44: Re-Opening the Bet.In no-limit and pot limit, an all-in wager of less than a full raise does not reopen betting for a player who has already acted and is not facing at least a full raise when the action returns to him.

Logged

Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown.But how much does it cost to knock on wood?

There is far too much confusion on this raise issue. What Mike has described is a situation where the SB goes all-in for 20K which is a 100% raise of the 10K BB. It has nothing to do with the earlier mentioned 14K. I really don't know why everyone insists on counting combined bets because they make no sense at all.

I believe I covered every scenario that Mike mentioned on an earlier post. If any player goes all-in with a short raise: Blinds 5K 10K...next player all-in with 11K, 12K, 13K, 14K, 15K, 16K, 17K, 18K, or 19K...the next raise must be 10K more in order to reopen the betting.

i.e.BB 10K UTG all-in for 11K, other players may fold, call the 11K or raise to at least 21K...same situation but the UTG goes all-in for 19K, both blinds can raise because they have not acted...their action was blind!

The guy who went all-in for 14k has the button, if there are "a couple limpers for 14k" after him, they would have to be the SB and BB. And only the SB and BB can re-raise the 14k... if they choose to limp for 14k then there is no possibility of a re-raise from any of those who initially limped the big blind for 10k, they can only smooth call the 14k because they have already acted.

Would you say I am correct in my examples? If I'm wrong please explain. I am also confused by your replies to Dave Miller: The guy who went all-in for 14K has the button, if there are "a couple limpers for 14K" after him, they would have to be the SB and BB. And only the SB and BB can re-raise the 14K...

I understand the last line about the blinds calling the 14K and the other players can not raise.

The final answer you gave is also a little confusing to me. You wrote: "there's no possibility of a player who has already acted going all-in for 20K, only the SB or BB could do it in this example. Sorry, I'm getting lost here.

The final answer you gave is also a little confusing to me. You wrote: "there's no possibility of a player who has already acted going all-in for 20K, only the SB or BB could do it in this example. Sorry, I'm getting lost here.

In the example there are "a couple limpers for 14k" (which would have to be the SB and BB), "then the all-in for 20k". That can't happen if the SB and BB have just limped. Everyone else to their left has already acted and can only smooth call the 14k.

For some reason I'm having a tough time sorting out your examples. I'll have to think this one out a little better and get back to you. I do have another question for you, which might help you understand why I'm not getting this!

When a player goes all-in, can another player go all-in for less than the required legal raise amount? Player A calls 10K BB, Player B goes all-in for 14K, Player C only has 18K...can he go all-in or must he only call the 14K and keep his 4K for another betting round?

I understand that, if he is allowed to go all-in for 18K, the min raise for the current round would now be 28K, correct?

When a player goes all-in, can another player go all-in for less than the required legal raise amount? Player A calls 10K BB, Player B goes all-in for 14K, Player C only has 18K...can he go all-in or must he only call the 14K and keep his 4K for another betting round?

Player C can absolutely go all-in for less than a full raise in this example because this is his first chance to act.

Look at a slightly different example where Player C wouldn't be allowed an all-in wager:

Player A calls 10K BB, Player B goes all-in for 14K, Player C (with a total of 18K in chips) pushes out 14K, Player D goes all-in for 16K, Player A calls the 16K.... Player B is already all-in for 14K, at this point Player C can only smooth call the 16K, he can't push all-in for 18K because he's already acted and he's not facing at least a full min-raise to him (which in this case would be 24K.